|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisements has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Should prisons be built that are crime related?
what I mean is that should prisons be built so that one is for thieves, another for killers, another for sex offenders etc.
I read a story last year I think on Yahoo News where they talked about the possibility of making colonies for sex offenders, since it was too costly to lock them up, and it's not safe to release them on the general public.
I don't believe necessarily in separating inmates based on the crime they've committed though.
I'm not sure it would be necessary (or realistic) to think prisons could be quite so broken down by crimes, but I do think white-collar criminals should be housed separately from people who have committed violent, or even "physically intrusive" crimes (like breaking into homes or cars); because, even though white-collar crime has its victims, it is a very different kind of crime than some other kinds.
I think there are more appropriate punishments for white-collar criminals than generally exist now. Letting them work and making them pay back money makes more sense than throwing them in with violent people or treating them as if they are. Taking away things they've gotten through illegal means would be one thing. So would requiring them to sell any property/belongings they have in order to repay what they've stolen. Letting them have nothing but what any individual needs to live (and an ankle bracelet) could be done by letting them in low-income housing (which would be punishment enough for a lot of people guilty of white-collar crime).
If they could write books, be consultants, or give lectures (especially if their crime was a high-profile one) they should be allowed to (required to) - with all income from such things going to their victims. If it takes the rest of their life, so be it. If they paid off what they owed early they could still live under this kind of restrictions for x amount of time, maybe with their money going into some fund for one thing or another. The "bar" for what constitutes "living in hell" is generally different from what "living in hell" is for people capable of being violent, intrusive, or otherwise victimizing people in "physical" ways.
Of course, as long as so many people seem to think money is ore important than people and life, we'll be having murderers, child molesters, and rapists who get out of prison, and walk the streets, in fifteen years (or three years); and white-collar criminals sent to prison for the rest of their lives.
No. You take your chances when you break the law.
There are some that are for sex offenders, but very few.
Is this the sort of set-up you're looking for:
http://www.china-underground.com/magazi … inese-hell
Criminals tend to learn from each other in prisons, and I'm not sure what effect this would have on a 'thieves only' prison for instance - would it breed a new generation of master burglars?
Actually, the current system was originally designed that way. Maximum security, was for murderers and predators. Medium security for crimes deemed less serious and with a shorter punishment length, (burglary,robbery etc). Minimum security for the most petty offenses such as drug related offenses, shoplifting and so on. The idea of segregating inmates even further based on their specific offense would not be financially feasible for any state. There would have to be literally 100's of prisons built in every state and each would only house approximately 20-50 prisoners.
by Ralph Schwartz23 months ago
What is your opinion on the double standard around criticizing judges in America?Donald Trump says a judge in the TrumpU case would be biased and the media flips out, says Trump has no right to question the judges...
by torril3 years ago
once someone has committed a crime, should society add to the problem by making it hard to get a jobto decide what society expects offenders to do once they have served their time and no one will employ them because of...
by strengthcourageme3 years ago
I was just wondering everyone's thoughts on gun control, are you for or against?
by ahorseback2 weeks ago
Machete , knives acid attacks ,cars , trucks ,bombs , gang beatings ..........seems to be an epidemic of crime rise in London lately , particularly those associated with the pro or anti-gun debate ? ...
by ngureco5 years ago
Should Inmates In Prisons Be Allowed Conjugal Visits By Their Spouses?
by susan terfa7 years ago
what make people trun to a life of crim?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.